A Review to Identify Key Perspectives in Problem-Based Learning Meta-Analyses and Reviews: Trends, Gaps, and Future Research Directions

• In Event: Celebrating 50 Years of Problem-Based Learning: Past, Present, and Future

Abstract

Purpose of the Study
In this paper, we attempt to depict the development and trends of PBL by analyzing the meta-analyses and systematic reviews on PBL as they reflected the trends with a focused lens on the PBL research in the past 50 years, which could help identify gaps in our understanding of PBL and suggest future directions for the field.

Theoretical Framework
The original McMaster PBL model has been trialed, revised, and modified (Wijnia, Loyens, & Rikers, 2019). Yet, the development of PBL is a journey of experiments, failures, and lessons learned. At its 50 years anniversary, it is an appropriate time to reflect on what conceptual paradigm shifts have taken place, what we can learn from these lessons, and what they can inform us of future directions.

Methods and Data Sources
Narrative review was chosen to be the research method for this review. In this review, we targeted at the meta-analyses and systematic reviews on PBL. A search was conducted in several databases, such as PsycInfo, MEDLINE Complete, and so on, with publication year range of 1980-2019. The search used keywords such as problem-based learning, PBL, problem-oriented learning, meta-analysis, and systematic review and so on. The search generated 1,415 hits. Further filters, preliminary scan of the titles and abstracts, as well as the inclusion criteria were applied and final 46 articles were identified, read and summarized for further synthesis.

Results
We identified three major waves in the development of PBL research. The first wave (Polarization: 1990-mid 2000) focused on the question “Does PBL work?” and the student learning outcomes. The results were conflicting. However, the contradictory results and the debates in fact pushed the researchers to look for new directions to solve the puzzle. These efforts resulted in the second wave (From outcomes to process: mid 2000 – mid 2010) that focused on “How does PBL work?” The second wave targeted at investigating the effects of implementation constituents, such as assessment formats or implement types (e.g. single versus curriculum wide implementations). The third wave (Specialization: mid 2010 and onward) focused on “How does PBL work in different contexts?” These studies widened our perspectives by expanding our understanding of how PBL manifests itself in different contexts, such as disciplines or cultures. Given the diversification of PBL and more hybrid PBL models, we suggest “Why does PBL with particular implementation characteristics for specific outcomes work or not work in the condition where it is implemented?” to be the question for the next wave of PBL research. Some potential topics might be worth exploring, such as inter-causal relationships among tutors’ training, quality, tutor fatigue with student group processing and motivation. Also, more research on interdisciplinary curriculum design and implementation and using qualitative research methods are needed, for example, sequential exploratory, sequential explanatory, or concurrent triangulation mixed methods, realist reviews with CMO (Context, Mechanism, & Outcomes), and design-based research methods.

Scholarly Significance
This reflection on the conceptual perspectives of PBL research could help inform the future directions of the field.

Authors

• Woei Hung, University of North Dakota

• Diana HJM Dolmans, Maastricht University

• Jeroen J.G. Van Merrienboer, Maastricht University